Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT03794726

Comparison of Orthodontic Molar Protraction With and Without Adjunctive Surgery

This study will compare orthodontic molar protraction with and without adjunctive periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontic (PAOO) surgery prior to orthodontic tooth movement.

To the investigators' knowledge, this type of molar retraction in adult patients has not been compared with and without the adjunctive use of PAOO for differences in clinical linear tooth movement and patient centered outcomes (discomfort, change in daily activities, satisfaction with esthetic outcomes) in a controlled study.

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Age range

18 year–99 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

About this study

Research data and daily clinical observations reveal that molar protraction (forward movement) in adult patients may be prolonged and ideal outcomes may not be achieved with traditional orthodontic tooth movement. One method for enhancing orthodontic tooth movement is the use of surgical access of the local site to initiate a regional tissue reaction to induce trauma, which leads to a limited inflammatory healing process. This process is also known as regional acceleratory phenomenon (RAP), which allows for more rapid bone turnover and has been shown in other protocols to enhance orthodontic tooth movement. While PAOO has been shown to rapidly increase tooth movement, to our knowledge, localized use of PAOO in combination with molar protraction in adults has not been evaluated in a prospective trial for differences in clinical outcomes (tooth movement time, adverse orthodontic outcomes, periodontal and soft tissue defects) and patient-centered outcomes (pain, swelling, change in daily activities, patient assessment of surgical benefit, and patient-assessed esthetics) in a controlled study.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • English speaking
  • At least 18 years old
  • Must be a patient of the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Dental School
  • Able to read and understand informed consent document
  • One or more nonadjacent 1st or 2nd molar teeth that require protraction of ≥ 5 mm in patients undergoing orthodontic tooth movement
  • Presence of periodontally healthy, non-carious neighboring teeth, healthy implants or edentulous ridges on either side of the involved site(s)
  • No anticipated need for restorative care at the teeth to be treated during the study period.

Exclusion criteria

  • Non-English speaking
  • Less than 18 years old
  • Smokers/tobacco users (>10 cigarettes/day)
  • Patients with systemic pathologies or conditions contraindicating oral surgical procedures or adversely affecting wound healing
  • Presence of active periodontal disease, caries, and/or periapical pathology at teeth to be moved orthodontically
  • Previous orthodontic therapy involving molar protraction of teeth to be treated
  • Previous periodontal surgery at site(s) to be treated

Treatment and study plan

Orthodontic Molar Protraction and PAOO

Procedure

Molar Protraction with Orthodontic Tooth Movement and Adjunctive Periodontally Accelerated Osteogenic Orthodontics (PAOO) Surgery was performed on all study sites in this arm in coordination with standard orthodontic molar protraction using traditional bands/brackets and orthodontic wires.

Orthodontic Molar Protraction

Procedure

Standard orthodontic molar protraction using traditional bands/brackets and orthodontic wires.

Primary outcomes

  1. Linear millimeters of molar tooth movement

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare the clinical linear molar tooth movement over a 3 month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontic therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).

  2. Tooth angulation as measured radiographically

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare the radiographic mesial inclination of the molar to be protracted over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Periodontal probing depth

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare the periodontal probing depth (PD) at six sites per tooth at treated teeth over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).

  2. Periodontal clinical attachment level

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare the clinical attachment level (CAL) at six sites per tooth at treated teeth over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).

  3. Periodontal width of keratinized tissue

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare the width of keratinized tissue (KT) at up to two sites per tooth at treated teeth over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).

  4. Periodontal width of attached tissue

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare the width of attached tissue at up to two sites per tooth at treated teeth over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).

  5. Practitioner-assessed treatment outcomes

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare the practitioner-assessed esthetic outcomes using the pink esthetic score (PES) (Belser et al., 2009) over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO). This score is a grid which assesses mesial and distal papilla fill on a 0-2 scale, curvature of facial gingiva on a 0-2 scale, level of facial gingiva on a 0-2 scale, and root convexity/soft tissue color and contour on a 0-2 scale for an overall maximum assessment of 10 for esthetics. A 10 score would be considered ideal esthetics and a 0 would be considered least desirable. Each individual component of the PES is summed to provide the ultimate PES score.

  6. Patient-assessed esthetic outcomes

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare the patient-assessed satisfaction with esthetic outcomes over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) using a visual analog scale from 0-100mm to determine the patients' assessment of their esthetic outcome.

  7. Patient centered post-operative discomfort assessment

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare treatment discomfort over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) using a visual analog scale from 0-100mm to determine the patients' assessment of the post-operative discomfort.

  8. Patient centered global treatment satisfaction

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare treatment overall treatment satisfaction over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) using a visual analog scale from 0-100mm to determine the patients' assessment of the patient's global assessment of treatment outcomes.

  9. Patient centered alteration of daily activities assessment

    Time frame: From baseline to 3months

    Compare assessment of post-treatment change in daily activities over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) using a visual analog scale from 0-100mm to determine the patients' assessment of the post-operative changes to daily activities.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Maria L. Geisinger, DDS,MS

CONTACT

[email protected]

996-7011

Sarah Startley

CONTACT

205-975-8711

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Alabama at Birmingham

Other

Registry information

Official study title

A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial to Compare Orthodontic Molar Protraction With and Without Adjunctive Periodontally Accelerated Osteogenic Orthodontic (PAOO) Surgery.

Acronym: PAOO

Important dates

Study start
2026
Primary completion
2027
Study completion
2028
First posted
Jan 7, 2019
Registry last updated
Jul 8, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.